Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31074399›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2019

Advanced hemostasis in axillary lymph node dissection for locally advanced breast cancer: new technology devices compared in the prevention of seroma formation.

Claudio Gambardella, Guglielmo Clarizia, Renato Patrone, Chiara Offi, Claudio Mauriello, Roberto Romano, Marco Filardo, Alessandra Conzo, Alessandro Sanguinetti, Andrea Polistena and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. A comparison of the Thunderbeat and standard electrocautery devices in head and neck surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudio GambardellaDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. claudiog86@hotmail.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2277-2960
Guglielmo ClariziaDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Renato PatroneDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Chiara OffiDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Claudio MaurielloDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Roberto RomanoDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Marco FilardoDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Alessandra ConzoDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Alessandro SanguinettiEndocrine Surgery Unit, University of Perugia, Piazza dell'Università, 06123, Perugia, Italy.
Andrea PolistenaEndocrine Surgery Unit, University of Perugia, Piazza dell'Università, 06123, Perugia, Italy.
Nicola AveniaEndocrine Surgery Unit, University of Perugia, Piazza dell'Università, 06123, Perugia, Italy.
Giovanni ConzoDivision of General and Oncologic Surgery - Department of Traslational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Perugia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is the most frequent neoplasm in women. Axillary lymph nodes dissection represents the treatment of choice in locally advanced breast cancer for prognostic and curative purposes. Seroma formation, an abnormal collection of fluid in the dead space of the axilla, is described in Literature with a wide range of incidence (3-85%). It is a source of significant morbidity and discomfort. The aim of the study is to compare the different haemostasis devices used in breast surgery, investigating the eventual superiority of an instrument among the others in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcome, especially of seroma formation.

methodsClinical cases of female patients undergone axillary lymph nodes dissection for local advanced breast cancer between January 2013 and July 2017 at the Surgery Unit of University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into four groups, according to device utilized during surgery: Electrocautery, Harmonic Scalpel, LigaSure and Thunderbeat. All patients underwent II level axillary lymph nodes dissection associated to radical mastectomy or quadrantectomy.

resultsOne hundred consecutives patients were enrolled in the study. Intra-operative blood loss resulted statistically significant different (P < 0,01) between the Electrocautery group (94,7 ml) and the Thunderbeat group (57,2 ml), while the Harmonic Scalpel group and the Ligasure group, despite presented a lower amount of blood loss, did not differ significantly. Drainage volume resulted significantly lower (P = 0,002) in the comparison between the Electrocautery group and the Thunderbeat group; the Ligasure group and Harmonic Scapel group showed no difference between them and Electrocautery group. About the seroma formation, the Electrocautery group resulted affected by the highest seroma formation rate (64%). Seroma incidence in Harmonic Scalpel group was 24%, in Ligasure group was 44%, while Thunderbeat group showed the lowest presentation of seroma with 16%.

conclusionsIn patients affected by breast cancer requiring axillary lymphnodes dissection, the use of advanced hemostasis devices is highly desirable. Among the non-traditional tools, Thunderbeat resulted to be superior in terms of reduction of intra-operative blood loss and post-operative drainage output, moreover associated to a substantial reduction of postoperative seroma incidence.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAxillaBlood Loss, SurgicalBreast NeoplasmsDrainageElectrocoagulationFemaleHemostasis, SurgicalHumansLymph Node ExcisionMastectomyMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPrognosisAdvanced breast cancerAdvanced hemostasis deviceAxillary lymphnodes dissectionSeroma

Identifiers

PMID31074399
PMCPMC7402581
OpenAlexW2941787149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.